EOS 5D SR

If we only get three lenses, I hoping 60mm macro is NOT one of them. (Already have the 100mm). I suppose it might be an "easy" upgrade for Canon if it's an EF-S lens â€“ Add IS and call it good. But, not sure of the demand.

Then again, I'm not sure why they needed four tilt-shift lenses either.

Can't really get too excited about any of the lenses that are surfacing in the rumors. Maybe good news for my checkbook, even if doesn't feed my addiction.

EOS RP

If we only get three lenses, I hoping 60mm macro is NOT one of them. (Already have the 100mm). I suppose it might be an "easy" upgrade for Canon if it's an EF-S lens – Add IS and call it good. But, not sure of the demand.

Then again, I'm not sure why they needed four tilt-shift lenses either.

Can't really get too excited about any of the lenses that are surfacing in the rumors. Maybe good news for my checkbook, even if doesn't feed my addiction.

I think a EF-S 60mm H-IS would be an attractive option for people who sticks to APS-C bodies. You'd be a lot better off with IS at the 100mm range (roughly 96mm with 1.6x bodies). The current 100mm becomes a 160mm, so the 100mm macro w/o IS might not make a good choice for entry model owners.

As for TS-E lens, they serve the niche market of architecture and landscape photography. While the general public may not see a need for these specialized primes, it makes life a lot easier for those who makes a living out of these fields (right now there's probably no competitor for the 17mm TSE).

C

Canon 14-24

Guest

As for TS-E lens, they serve the niche market of architecture and landscape photography. While the general public may not see a need for these specialized primes, it makes life a lot easier for those who makes a living out of these fields (right now there's probably no competitor for the 17mm TSE).

scott

Guest

I hope they announce the 60D and I will be buying it along with the EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS. Otherwise, I will be picking up the 7D. I have almost pulled the trigger on the 7D a few times while buying glass or other electronics on Amazon.

i would love more primes, because i love my fast lenses, but those sound highly unlikely. the 180 will not get 1 2/3 stops faster all at once (though it would be awesome) and a 28 is too close to the 24. I hope the 24-105 goes to 2.8, or some zoom lens gets a constant f/2. my viewfinder is just too spoiled by f/1.4 to settle for an f/4 zoom, no matter how sharp it is.

i would love more primes, because i love my fast lenses, but those sound highly unlikely. the 180 will not get 1 2/3 stops faster all at once (though it would be awesome) and a 28 is too close to the 24. I hope the 24-105 goes to 2.8, or some zoom lens gets a constant f/2. my viewfinder is just too spoiled by f/1.4 to settle for an f/4 zoom, no matter how sharp it is.

Actually, there's a rumor (the discussion was sent to the bodies forum) that the 35mm prime will get an upgrade, with an f/1.8 max aperture. This sounds surprising, but as I wrote before - I think it's about time Canon re-did it's cheaper 20mm-24mm-28mm-35mm primes with improved optics, f/1.8 aperture, and USM.

muteteh

Guest

<span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">Iâ€™m told we can expect 3 new lenses to be shown off at the Canon EXPO and Photokina.</span></strong><strong> </strong>Canon lauched 3 lenses with the 7D last year, so itâ€™s notÃ‚ unprecedented.</p>
<p>A 4th lens would be announced in the November/December timeframe with a â€œnew camera bodyâ€.</p>
<p>Sadly, no confirmation on which lenses will arrive.</p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>

EOS 80D

Nobody has mentioned the stupidest thing about this lens. It's not the variable aperture. It's not the slow f/5.6 at the 300mm end of the range. And it's not the salty price.

It's the zoom ring out in FRONT of the focus ring, the opposite of any other lens in the Canon line (that I know of, correct me if I'm wrong). Imagine going back and forth between, say, a 24-105 f/4.0 and this lens. You'd go to zoom, but mess up your focus instead. That's the same deal breaker as on the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8.

Un-flippin'-believable.

M

MadButcher

Guest

Damned. I allready thought I saw that or somethings.
It's true, that is fucking unbelievable.
This is indeed real stupid.
It's the same thing as using clockwise turning instead to zoom in (like Nikon).

Jack

Guest

Nobody has mentioned the stupidest thing about this lens. It's not the variable aperture. It's not the slow f/5.6 at the 300mm end of the range. And it's not the salty price.

It's the zoom ring out in FRONT of the focus ring, the opposite of any other lens in the Canon line (that I know of, correct me if I'm wrong). Imagine going back and forth between, say, a 24-105 f/4.0 and this lens. You'd go to zoom, but mess up your focus instead. That's the same deal breaker as on the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8.